English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

In autologous breast reconstruction, the internal mammary artery (IMA) and internal mammary vein (IMV) are the standard recipient vessels. Recently, the perforator vessels of the IMA and IMV were found to be a safe alternative as recipient vessels cause less morbidity and allow adequate flap. We describe 2 cases in which the IMA and IMV perforators were used as additional recipient vessels to overcome intraoperatively occurred complications. The IMA and IMV perforators have some advantages over the IMA/IMV: (1) the dissection is done superficially and directly from the mastectomy site. Flap positioning is facilitated. (2) There is no need to remove a rib, which reduces postoperative pain and possible contour deformities. (3) Possible injuries to the pleura are avoided. (4) The IMA is spared for possible cardiac revascularization. Disadvantages can be that (1) the IMA perforators are not always present with the required caliber, (2) the position of the perforators is not suitable to adequately position the flap, and (3) dissection of the IMA perforators and their anastomoses has a learning curve. In the presented cases, the IMA and IMV perforators have proven to offer a simple solution to avoid complications. The additional dissection is done from the same recipient site, and there is no further dissection or incision necessary at the axilla or to explore the cephalic vein. This keeps morbidity and operation time low. Therefore, we suggest keeping the IMA and IMV perforators in mind not only as primary recipient vessels but also as a possible solution for intraoperatively occurred complications.

Internal Mammary Artery and Vein Perforator Vessels as Troubleshooter Recipient Vessels